APHC010091022026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3331] MONDAY, THE TWENTY THIRD DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI WRIT PETITION NO: 5081/2026 Between: 1. GERA FRANKLIN, S/O. VENKATESH, AGED ABOUT 74 YEARS, OCC AGRICULTURE, R/O. DOOR NO. 1-61, SANTHI NAGAR COLONY, MULAKALURU VILLAGE, NARASARAOPET MANDAL, PALNADU DISTRICT. 2. CHANDAVARAPU MARY,, W/O. JOSEPH, AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS, OCC. HOUSE WIFE, R/O. DOOR NO. 4-171, SANTHI NAGAR COLONY, MULAKALURU VILLAGE, NARASARAOPET MANDAL, PALNADU DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER(S) AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, PANCHAYAT RAJ AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, A.P. SECRETARIAT BUILDING, AT VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATI - 522237. 2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, NARASARAOPET, PALNADU DISTRICT - 522601. 3. THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, NARASARAOPET, PALNADU DISTRICT - 522601. 4. THE TAHSILDAR, NARASARAOPET MANDAL, PALNADU DISTRICT - 522601. 5. THE MULAKALURU GRAM PANCHAYAT, REP. BY ITS PANCHAYAT SECRETARY NARASARAOPET MANDAL, PALNADU DISTRICT - p. 2 522601. 6. MUCCHU PULLAIAH, S/O. BRAHMAIAH, AGED ABOUT YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURE R/O. SANTHI NAGAR COLONY, MULAKALURU VILLAGE, NARASARAOPET MANDAL, PALNADU DISTRICT - 522601. ...RESPONDENT(S): Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue a writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents 2 to 4 in seeking demolition of the boundary wall of the 2nd petitioner and through vacant land of the 1st petitioner for providing pathway to the 6th respondent from the petitioners land bounded by East petitioners Land 4ft, South Gera Kumaris land 87ft, West Gera Srinu and other's land 4ft, North Petitioners land 87ft an extent of 38.66 Sq. yds in Survey No.SOO/Bl, 478/1 of Mulakaluru Village, Narasaraopet Mandal, Palnadu District, without following any procedure known to law as illegal and against to principles of natural justice and violative of Article 14, 19(l)(g), 21 and 300-A of Constitution of India and pass such IA NO: 1 OF 2026 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased may be pleased to direct the respondents not to demolish the boundary wall of the 2nd petitioner to create pathway to the 6*^^ respondent in between the petitioners land, pending disposal of the above writ petition and pass such Counsel for the Petitioner(S): 1. RAMESH BABU NELATURI Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR PANCHAYAT RAJ RURAL DEV 2. Mattegunta.Sudhir,Standing Counsel For Z.P.Ps,M.P.Ps,Gram Panchayats p. 3 The Court made the following: ::ORDER :: Heard Sri N. Ramesh Babu, learned counsel for the petitioner; Sri Rajesh Kumar, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Panchayat Raj appeared for respondent No.1; Ms. Usha, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue appeared for respondents 2, 3 & 4 and Sri Hruthik, learned counsel representing Sri M. Sudhir, learned Standing Counsel appeared for respondent No.5. Notice of respondent No.6 is dispensed with since no adverse order is passed affecting the right and interest of respondent No.6. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the 1st petitioner is the absolute owner and possessor of land admeasuring 38.66 Square Yards in Sy.No.500/B1, 478/1 of Mulakaluru Village, Narasaraopet Mandal, Palnadu District. The 1st petitioner purchased the same under the registered document dated 05.05.2023. The 2nd petitioner is the daughter of the 1st petitioner, having land to the North-East corner of the 1st petitioner’s land and constructed a house by obtaining a plan from respondent No.5, and has been residing therein. Respondents 2 to 4, along with respondent No.5, came to the aforementioned land on 29.01.2026 and demanded that the pathway be provided to respondent No.6, without issuing any notice. 3. Sri Hruthik, learned counsel, submitted the written instructions of respondent No.5. As seen from the instructions, the 1st petitioner’s land is vacant, and it is classified as patta. The 1st petitioner purchased the same. No notice was issued to the 2nd petitioner regarding the demolition of the compound wall. The Gram Panchayat issued a notice dated 21.02.2026 to the 2nd petitioner to submit the documents relating to the building permission. The instructions further disclose that the dispute between the petitioners and respondent No.6 regarding the pathway is a civil dispute, and the official respondents are not interfering with the same. p. 4 4. Ms. Usha, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue, submitted the written instructions of respondent No.4. As seen from the instructions, one Sri Mucchu Kannaiah, an Army Officer, submitted a grievance petition in the Collector’s Office. The District Collector, Palnadu District, called for an action taken report. Respondent No.4, along with respondent No.3, inspected the site and found that no structures or boundary walls were removed, and no demolition works had been undertaken. 5. Thus, as seen from the instructions, neither respondents 3 & 4 nor respondent No.5 interfered with the petitioners’ possession and enjoyment of the house/vacant land. 6. Given the facts and circumstances of the case, the Writ Petition is disposed of at the stage of admission with the consent of both the learned counsel, directing the respondents to follow the due procedure of law regarding the aforementioned property. No order as to costs. As a sequel, pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed. ___________________________ JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI Date: 23.02.2026 TVN p. 5 248 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI WRIT PETITION NO: 5081 of 2026 Date: 23.02.2026 TVN